green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
13.6 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1995 ·
…it is hornbook law that theories not raised squarely in the district court cannot be surfaced for the first time on appeal.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 57 v. Seaboard Surety Co.
despite the fact that casts a long shadow, erisa preemption is not limitless.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
The Newspaper Guild v. Ottaway Newspapers
a litigant has an obligation 'to spell out its arguments squarely and distinctly' . . . or else forever hold its peace.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Ute Indian Tribe v. State of Utah
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
among the law of the case rules is the obligation of every court to honor the rulings of a court that stands higher in the hierarchical judicial structure. 18 c. wright, a. miller e. cooper, federal practice and procedure, 4478 at 788.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
T I Federal Credit Union v. DelBonis
it is hornbook law that theories not raised squarely in the district court cannot be surfaced for the first time on appeal.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
T I v. DelBonis
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
it is hornbook law that theories not raised squarely in the district court cannot be surfaced for the first time on appeal.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wyche v. KM Systems Inc.
See Caribbean Trading & Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir.1991) (holding that a court may not entertain “arguments raised for the first time on a motion for reconsideration”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Wiesner v. 321 W. 16th St.
cited
Cited "see"
Brown v. Colegio De Abogados De Puerto Rico
See McCoy v. Mass. Inst. of Tech., 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Morin v. United States
See Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 741 F.Supp. 1472, 1496 (D.Kan.1990), aff'd in part, 948 F.2d 1546 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Benedi v. McNeil-P.P.C., Inc., 66 F.3d 1378, 1384 (4th Cir. 1995) (permitting treating physician to render an opinion that combining alcohol with therapeutic doses of acetaminophen caused liver disease in light of “medical community’s daily use of the same methodologies in diagnosing patients”).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litigation
See Caribbean Trading & Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian Nat’l Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir.1991) (holding that a court may not entertain “arguments raised for the first time on a motion for reconsideration”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Wiesner v. 821 W. 16th St.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Cooper
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 949 (7th Cir.1991), ce rt. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hernandez-Sendejas
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 949 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992) (A bill of particulars is not required where the information necessary for one’s defense can be obtained through some other satisfactory form.).
discussed
Cited "see"
Roberts v. Galen of Virginia, Inc.
See United States v. Mohney, 949 F.2d 1397, 1404 (6th Cir.1991) (holding that “[t]he decision to permit a witness to remain in the courtroom ‘is within the discretion of the trial judge and should not normally be disturbed on appeal’ ”) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Roberts v. Galen Of Virginia
See United States v. Mohney, 949 F.2d 1397, 1404 (6th Cir. 1991) (holding that "[t]he decision to permit a witness to remain in the courtroom `is within the discretion of the trial judge and should not normally be disturbed on appeal'") (citation omitted), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Logan
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 949 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. The Stroh Companies, Inc. And the Stroh Brewery Company
See Caribbean Trading & Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian Nat'l Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir.1991) (holding that predecessor to Rule 6.3 "pre-clud[es] arguments raised for the first time on a motion for reconsideration"), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Polsby v. St.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ponce Munoz
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 949 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Halpin v. Kiewit, J.V.
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992)(theory waived when at district court only passing mention made and no analysis or presentation of legal authority supporting the theory).
discussed
Cited "see"
Halpin v. Kiewit, J.V.
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992)(theory waived when at district court only passing mention made and no analysis or presentation of legal authority supporting the theory).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Carrigg
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d, 13, 22 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992); Jeffrey v. Desmond, 70 F.3d at 185 n. 5.
discussed
Cited "see"
Sutera v. Perrier Group of America, Inc.
See Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 741 F.Supp. 1472, 1496 (D.Kan.1990), aff'd in part, 948 F.2d 1546 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Benedi v. McNeil-P.P.C., Inc., 66 F.3d 1378, 1384 (4th Cir.1995) (permitting treating physician to render an opinion that combining alcohol with therapeutic doses of acetaminophen caused liver disease in light of “medical community’s daily use of the same methodologies in diagnosing patients”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Continental Trend Resources, Inc. v. OXY USA Inc.
See Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 948 F.2d 1546, 1561 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); see also Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1258 (9th Cir.1993) (“To avoid any conflict with the Seventh Amendment, the preferable choice is to afford the party awarded the grossly excessive punitive damages, whether that is determined by a trial court or appellate court, the option of either accepting the remittitur of the punitive damages award or a new trial on that issue.”), cert. dismissed, 510 U.S. 1033 , 114 S.Ct. 671 , 126 L.Ed.2d 640 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Continental Trend Resources, Inc. v. Oxy Usa Inc.
See Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 948 F.2d 1546, 1561 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); see also Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1258 (9th Cir.1993) ("To avoid any conflict with the Seventh Amendment, the preferable choice is to afford the party awarded the grossly excessive punitive damages, whether that is determined by a trial court or appellate court, the option of either accepting the remittitur of the punitive damages award or a new trial on that issue."), cert. dismissed, 510 U.S. 1033 , 114 S.Ct. 671 , 126 L.Ed.2d 640 (1994). 40 We AFFIR…
cited
Cited "see"
Mulero Rodriguez v. Ponte, Inc.
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
72 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 406, 69 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,437 Gilberto Mulero-Rodrguez, Gladys Ortiz-Margarys v. Ponte, Inc. And Haydee Sabines, Widow of Ponte
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Cofield v. Desmond
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992). 6 Affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Cofield v. Desmond
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of ___ _____ _______________________ Technology, 950 __________ -4- F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 _____________ (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
CMM Cable Rep, Inc. v. Ocean Coast Properties, Inc.
See generally McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Techn., 950 F.2d 13 , 22 & n. 7 (1st Cir.1991) (citing cases), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cmm Cable Rep, Inc., D/B/A Creative Media Management, Inc. v. Ocean Coast Properties, Inc., D/b/a/ Wpor-Fm, Robert Gold, Individually and Officially as General Manager, Graphics North, Inc. And James Spizuoco, Cmm Cable Rep, Inc., D/B/A Creative Media Management, Inc. v. Ocean Coast Properties, Inc., D/b/a/ Wpor-Fm, Robert Gold, Individually and Officially as General Manager, Graphics North, Inc. And James Spizuoco
See generally McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Techn., 950 F.2d 13 , 22 & n. 7 (1st Cir.1991) (citing cases), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992). 84 Despite our well-established rules and "customary practice," Boston Beer, 9 F.3d at 181 , CMM nonetheless insists in its reply brief that we should not find waiver, suggesting that, because it has not raised any new theory on appeal that was not presented in its memorandum of law in support of its preliminary injunction motion, it has not "ambushed" WPOR or the district court.
cited
Cited "see"
Building Industry Fund v. Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
See Caribbean Trading & Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian National Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941, 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Plumbing Industry Board, Plumbing Local Union No. 1 v. L & L Masons, Inc.
See McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 18-20 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992); Sturgis v. Herman Miller, Inc., 943 F.2d 1127, 1129-30 (9th Cir.1991); Iron Workers Mid-South Pension Fund v. Terotechnology Corp., 891 F.2d 548, 556 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 497 U.S. 1024 , 110 S.Ct. 3272 , 111 L.Ed.2d 782 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Edmonds
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 947 (7th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Theodore Edmonds
(2×)
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 947 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Edward James Demarey
See United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 943 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Equine Technologies, Inc. v. Equitechnology, Inc.
See Boston Beer, 9 F.3d at 180 (“a litigant’s failure to explicitly raise an issue before the district court forecloses that party from raising the issue for the first time on appeal”) (citing McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 950 F.2d 13, 22 (1st Cir.1981), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992)).
discussed
Cited "see"
James E. Akins v. Federal Election Commission
(2×)
See generally McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, 950 F.2d 13 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Faison
See General Statutes § 54-86e. 2 The court further noted that “[t]he effective defense theory has not been well received by the other Circuit Courts of Appeals.” State v. Holmes, supra, 257 Conn. 255 n.7 ; see also United States v. Mohney, 949 F.2d 1397, 1401 (6th Cir. 1991) (effective defense theory rejected because “it would violate separation of powers to recognize an inherent judicial right to grant immunity when immunity is a legislative creation explicitly entrusted to the executive branch” and because it “could also impair the subsequent prosecution of the witness”), cert. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Christopher Scott and Johnny Ray Butler
Compare United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 947-48 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 996 , 112 S.Ct. 1701 , 118 L.Ed.2d 410 (1992), 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1940 , 118 L.Ed.2d 546 (1992), 504 U.S. 915 , 112 S.Ct. 1954 , 118 L.Ed.2d 558 (1992) (instruction unnecessary), with United States v. Echeverri, 854 F.2d 638, 642-43 (3d Cir.1988) (instruction required), and with United States v. Hernandez-Escarsega, 886 F.2d 1560, 1572-73 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 497 U.S. 1003 , 110 S.Ct. 3237 , 111 L.Ed.2d 748 (1990) (“better practice” is to give instruction, but harmless error under fa…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Christopher Scott
Compare United States v. Canino, 949 F.2d 928, 947-48 (7th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 996 , 504 U.S. 910 , 915 (1992), 525 U.S. 900 (1998) (instruction unnecessary), with United States v. Echeverri, 854 F.2d 638, 642-43 (3d Cir. 1988) (instruction required), and with United 1 The Honorable Lyle E.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
BELL ATLANTIC NETWORK SERVICES v. PM Video Corp.
See, e.g., Mason v. Texaco, 948 F. 2d 1546, 1561 (10th Cir.1991) cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed. 2d 547 (1992); Aldrich v. Thomson McKinnon Secs., Inc., 756 F. 2d 243, 249 (2d Cir.1985); Malandris v. Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 703 F. 2d 1152 (10th Cir.1981) cert. denied, 464 U.S. 824 , 104 S.Ct. 92 , 78 L.Ed. 2d 99 (1983); Slater v. KFC Corp., 621 F. 2d 932 (8th Cir.1980); and Smyth Sales v. Petroleum Heat & Power Co., 141 F. 2d 41 (3rd Cir.1944).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kamplain v. Curry County Board Of Commissioners
Other courts have limited immunity to functions involving legislative speech and debate, voting, preparing committee reports, conducting committee hearings, and other "integral steps in the legislative process." Bogan, 523 U.S. at ----, 118 S.Ct. at 973 ; see, e.g., Hansen v. Bennett, 948 F.2d 397, 402 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992). 7 Not all actions taken at a legislative meeting by a local legislator are legislative for purposes of immunity.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kamplain v. Curry County Board of Commissioners
Other courts have limited immunity to functions involving, legislative speech and debate, voting, preparing committee reports, conducting committee hearings, and other “integral steps in the legislative process.” Bogan , — U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 973 ; see, e.g., Hansen v. Bennett, 948 F.2d 397, 402 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Harry's Cocktail Lounge, Inc., a California Corporation Paul Bailey, an Individual Denise Bailey, an Individual Vincent Molino, an Individual Joan Bailey, an Individual v. Brook McMahon Individually and in His Official Capacity as Chief of Police of Pismo Beach, California Scott Smith, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Police Officer Employed by the Police Department of Pismo Beach, California Mark Stewart, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a Police Officer Employed by the Police Department of Pismo Beach, California City of Pismo Beach, California, a Municipality Dick Morrow, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of Pismo Beach, California, and Member of the Pismo Beach City Council Michael Fiorentino, Individually and in His Official Capacity as a City Councilman of Pismo Beach, California Tim Bittner, in His Official Capacity as a City Councilman of Pismo Beach, California Jim Maroney, in His Official Capacity as a City Councilman of Pismo Beach, California Robert M. Jones, Individually and in His Capacity as a Police Officer Employed by the City of Pismo Beach, California
See also Hoesterey v. City of Cathedral City, 945 F.2d 317, 319 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992); Cline v. Brusett, 661 F.2d 108, 110 (9th Cir.1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Maldonado-Coronel v. McElroy
See, e.g., Caribbean Trading and Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian Nat’l Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
71 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1398, 35 fed.r.serv.3d 395 Miguel Angel Ayala-Gerena v. Bristol Myers-Squibb Company, D/B/A Bristol Myers-Squibb
See, e.g., McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Techn., 950 F.2d 13, 23 (1st Cir.1991) (finding waiver where party failed to meet affirmative responsibility of putting “best foot forward in an effort to present some legal theory that will support [its] claim”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992); United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.) (reiterating that “issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived”), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1082 , 110 S.Ct. 1814 , 108 L.Ed.2d 944 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ayala-Gerena v. Bristol-Myers
See e.g., McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Techn., ___ ____ _____ ______________________________ 950 F.2d 13, 23 (1st Cir. 1991) (finding waiver where party failed to meet affirmative responsibility of putting "best foot forward in an effort to present some legal theory that will support [its] claim"), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992); United ____________ ______ States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.) (reiterating that ______ _______ "issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived."), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1082 (1990…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ayala-Gerena v. Bristol-Myers
See e.g., McCoy v. Massachusetts Inst. of Techn., 950 F.2d 13, 23 (1st Cir. 1991) (finding waiver where party failed to meet affirmative responsibility of putting "best foot forward in an effort to present some legal theory that will support [its] claim"), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 (1992); United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.) (reiterating that "issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived."), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1082 (1990).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Cellilli v. Cellilli
See also McCoy v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 950 F.2d 13 , 14 n. 1 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1939 , 118 L.Ed.2d 545 (1992); Bergin v. Wausau Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mehlman v. Mobil Oil Corp.
See 16 C.F.R. § 1500.14 (b)(3)(i); see also Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 741 F. Supp. 1472, 1482 (D.Kan. 1990) (identifying the link, revealed through scientific research, between benzene exposure and leukemia, among other cancers of the blood), aff'd in part and remanded, 948 F. 2d 1546 (10th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed. 2d 547 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jack Randell v. United States
See also Caribbean Trading and Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian Natl Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 115 (2d Cir.1991) (Civil Rule 3(j) “has been interpreted as precluding arguments raised for the first time on a motion for reconsideration”), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992); Morse/Diesel, Inc. v. Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Md., 768 F.Supp. 115, 116 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (under Local Rule 3(j) party may not advance new facts, issues, or arguments not previously presented to the court).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Result Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Ferruzzi Trading USA Inc.
Compare Banque Nordeurope, 970 F.2d at 1130-31 (orders granting or denying security are immediately appealable if they present important issues of law), with Caribbean Trading & Fidelity Corp. v. Nigerian National Petroleum Corp., 948 F.2d 111, 114 (2d Cir.1991) (orders denying security are immediately appealable, but orders granting security are not), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 910 , 112 S.Ct. 1941 , 118 L.Ed.2d 547 (1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
McCoy, Administrator of the Electrical Workers Trust Funds, Local 103 I. B. E. W.
v.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
v.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
No. 91-1337.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 18, 1992.
504 U.S. 910
Published
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.